Atlantic Station - Millennium Gate Monument

[smArTaLlone]

Originally Posted by ThrashATL

The one thing everyone can agree on about AS is that it's better than what was there, an industrial wasteland eyesore. Now we have a commercial wasteland eyesore, a step up.

An eyesore that's packed with suburbanites every weekend. I guess its Old Navy and Guess that's attracting them.

[Tombstoner]

Spurtslover asks: "Did you or any of the harsh critics of the monument take time to read about it? It doesn't sound like you did..."

I suspect most critics know all about the background to the monument and just aren't as easily impressed as he is (but God bless him--folks like him make Atlanta the world-class city that it is), but that's beside the point. Critics of the McMonument are, by and large, not critical of AS, but of the aesthetics of the monument itself.

[ATLaffinity]

Originally Posted by sprtsluvr8

Did you or any of the harsh critics of the monument take time to read about it? It doesn't sound like you did.

Oh, yes, let's read about the monument...

The Millennium Gate will first and foremost be a work of art, but also importantly, a cutting edge educational tool. We will be concentrating on a three-fold story: First, the peaceful accomplishment of the last 2000 years, second, the ascension of the United States within that continuum and, third, the city and how, because of a different credo than other regional cities, Atlanta became a giant, globally important city in a relatively short period of time.

that's so disingenuous on so many levels. i can only hope they were just retroactively trying to justify this crap.

btw, what is our "credo"? i hope it's better than our "O" slogan.

...Atlanta was unusual in the South having founding families whose credo was what was good for Atlanta was good for business. (Compare this to other southern cities whose credos were what was good for business was good for the city.)

[sprtsluvr8]

Ok, so now you have a problem with the wording on the monument's website? Give me a friggin break...it's such an immature position to take on a structure that is UNDER CONSTRUCTION and nowhere near complete. And now the wording in part of the description is disingenuous. There were pages of information that you didn't post here. Was it all disingenuous?

Some of these responses make me sick. I'm waiting to see the monument some of you come up with that puts this one to shame...sorry, Snoopy wouldn't quite do it.

How about a little civic pride and support for an attemt to add a lasting landmark to the city of Atlanta? I always hear complaints that there isn't an identifying structure for the city - yet when one that could be just that is being constructed, there are yet more complaints that it sucks. I guess when the St. Louis Arch was proposed it drew the same kind of commentary.

[ATLaffinity]

Originally Posted by sprtsluvr8

I guess when the St. Louis Arch was proposed it drew the same kind of commentary.

that takes the cake. i can't top that. The Mileniuum Gate and the Gateway Arch by Eero Saarinen

[Tombstoner]

Originally Posted by ATLaffinity

that takes the cake. i can't top that. The Mileniuum Gate and the Gateway Arch by Eero Saarinen

And we wonder why Atlanta is Atlanta...

[sprtsluvr8]

Originally Posted by ATLaffinity

that takes the cake. i can't top that. The Mileniuum Gate and the Gateway Arch by Eero Saarinen

You can't because you weren't around when it was proposed and constructed in St. Louis. There are still people there who despise it, even though it has become a worldwide symbol of the city of St. Louis. By the way, no one compared the two structures, although you apparently interpreted my statement as though I did compare them. I simply made a point that a structure as special as the Arch was chastised by some idiots in its planning stages.

And your snotty reply is exactly the kind I was referring to. I'm trying to share information and educate, while you're trying to refute every positive statement that has been made. It takes years for a new structure like this one to gain respect...and if this monument does become something special in the future, you will simply be remembered as one of the imbeciles who derided it before it even had a chance. That's always an intelligent position - laugh at and make fun of something before it is even in existence. Good job.

[ATLaffinity]

Originally Posted by sprtsluvr8

and if this monument does become something special in the future, you will simply be remembered as one of the imbeciles who derided it before it even had a chance. That's always an intelligent position - laugh at and make fun of something before it is even in existence. Good job.

you stay classy, sportsluvr! nice ad hominem attack.

i wouldn't worry about anybody being "remembered" for any reason regarding MG. mercifully, it hasn't even received press in Atlanta, let alone beyond the city.

[STrek777]

Originally Posted by ATLaffinity

you stay classy, sportsluvr! nice ad hominem attack.

i wouldn't worry about anybody being "remembered" for any reason regarding MG. mercifully, it hasn't even received press in Atlanta, let alone beyond the city.

You know I didn't even think about it until you just mentioned it. There hasn't been any press around the Millennium Arch. Now that is funny!

Sportsluvr can say what ever but I have been following this Monument since it was proposed. I DO NOT LIKE IT or rather I do not like it in AS. It is surrounded by stucco homes made very cheaply. I’ll venture as far to say that there is nothing in the commons that even begins to compare to the pleasant original renderings of that area. It is a cheap McArea that will now have a cheap McMonument next to an elaborate retention pond. The monument doesn’t even have the same sightlines as it used to. It would have made more sense to keep the monument on the State St side and the Museum on the Village St side of the park. That way you keep the dominate sightlines of the monument that would at least give it a look of importance. Now it looks like an arch that was just put there because they had no where else to put it.

Have a monument that stands for peace and justice is fine putting a classical European style arch in AS not so fine.

Grant Park is long overdue for an extreme make over and already houses the Cyclorama and one of the oldest zoos in the county. This would have made a fantastic entry to the north end of the park. After all, Piedmont Park has its grand 14th street entrance with a huge gate statue and staircase. If the developers had gone to the city and said we want to revitalize Grant Park and build a monument as a grand symbol for Atlanta’s accomplishments I don’t think there would be much of an issue. Shirley’s eyes would have glistened at the prospect of using the monument to persuade developers to go in and overhaul the Grant Park area.

Instead we get a square peg that has been shoved into a round hole. Over time people aren’t going to look at it and go “how majestic” they’re going to look at it and say “it looks crooked”. Once all is said and done will each individual element look stately… maybe? As a whole will it make sense? Not in a millennium.

[sprtsluvr8]

Originally Posted by ATLaffinity

you stay classy, sportsluvr! nice ad hominem attack.

i wouldn't worry about anybody being "remembered" for any reason regarding MG. mercifully, it hasn't even received press in Atlanta, let alone beyond the city.

What else does your crystal ball tell you Dark Lady? Good God...

[sprtsluvr8]

Originally Posted by STrek777

You know I didn't even think about it until you just mentioned it. There hasn't been any press around the Millennium Arch. Now that is funny!

Sportsluvr can say what ever but I have been following this Monument since it was proposed. I DO NOT LIKE IT or rather I do not like it in AS. It is surrounded by stucco homes made very cheaply. I’ll venture as far to say that there is nothing in the commons that even begins to compare to the pleasant original renderings of that area. It is a cheap McArea that will now have a cheap McMonument next to an elaborate retention pond. The monument doesn’t even have the same sightlines as it used to. It would have made more sense to keep the monument on the State St side and the Museum on the Village St side of the park. That way you keep the dominate sightlines of the monument that would at least give it a look of importance. Now it looks like an arch that was just put there because they had no where else to put it.

Have a monument that stands for peace and justice is fine putting a classical European style arch in AS not so fine.

Grant Park is long overdue for an extreme make over and already houses the Cyclorama and one of the oldest zoos in the county. This would have made a fantastic entry to the north end of the park. After all, Piedmont Park has its grand 14th street entrance with a huge gate statue and staircase. If the developers had gone to the city and said we want to revitalize Grant Park and build a monument as a grand symbol for Atlanta’s accomplishments I don’t think there would be much of an issue. Shirley’s eyes would have glistened at the prospect of using the monument to persuade developers to go in and overhaul the Grant Park area.

Instead we get a square peg that has been shoved into a round hole. Over time people aren’t going to look at it and go “how majestic” they’re going to look at it and say “it looks crooked”. Once all is said and done will each individual element look stately… maybe? As a whole will it make sense? Not in a millennium.

Oh, okay...YOU don't like it...Stop the construction! Two idiots in the skyscraperpage forum don't like the monument!

You're such a scholar...

[mayhem]

If you're opinion differs that much, just let each other be. This is a warning.

[Toxostoma Rufum]

Originally Posted by sprtsluvr8

Ok, so now you have a problem with the wording on the monument's website? Give me a friggin break...it's such an immature position to take on a structure that is UNDER CONSTRUCTION and nowhere near complete. And now the wording in part of the description is disingenuous. There were pages of information that you didn't post here. Was it all disingenuous?

Some of these responses make me sick. I'm waiting to see the monument some of you come up with that puts this one to shame...sorry, Snoopy wouldn't quite do it.

How about a little civic pride and support for an attemt to add a lasting landmark to the city of Atlanta? I always hear complaints that there isn't an identifying structure for the city - yet when one that could be just that is being constructed, there are yet more complaints that it sucks. I guess when the St. Louis Arch was proposed it drew the same kind of commentary.

If MG is going to be so great for Atlanta, they had better restrict the roads around it to one lane a side since it's bound to attract great foot traffic from admiring Tech and GSU students. We need to protect these frail pedestrians from the evil horseless carriages.

Weren't such arches built originally as memorials to Military Triumph rather than a vague Up With People excercise? That's what really irks me about this project.

[Tombstoner]

I think it's incredibly unintelligent to say "Years from now, people will love this" or "They all laughed at Christopher Columbus (or the St. Louis Arch), and they were wrong...therefore, if you are critical of something now, you must be wrong too." Both of those statements are great examples of fallacious reasoning.

No one knows how the Arch d'IKEA is going to be thought of in 10, 20 or 50 years. Maybe people will love it or maybe it will be a laughingstock -- nobody knows, so why use that as an argument??? It would be just as silly to say "Gee, it looks great now, but in the future, people are going to hate it." Of course, you can think that, but do you really think that's an argument?

The other argument, comparing it to the St Louis Arch, is even worse. It assumes that somehow the two edifices are somehow similar in some significant respect and thus public reaction to them will be similar. They are different edifices, we are different publics, one is genuinely original (whether you like it or not--I happen to) and the other is a hoary imitation of much-better known (and genuinely monumental) monuments. Why would anyone even compare them? Why not compare a WalMart to the Taj Mahal? They both occupy space...

[sprtsluvr8]

Originally Posted by mayhem

If you're opinion differs that much, just let each other be. This is a warning.

Ok, it's not so much a difference of opinion...I don't have an issue with these guys not appreciating this monument. It's their snide and catty remarks about it each time something positive is posted. I try to point out something good about the monument...they tear down whatever I've posted.

[sprtsluvr8]

Originally Posted by Tombstoner

I think it's incredibly unintelligent to say "Years from now, people will love this" or "They all laughed at Christopher Columbus (or the St. Louis Arch), and they were wrong...therefore, if you are critical of something now, you must be wrong too." Both of those statements are great examples of fallacious reasoning.

No one knows how the Arch d'IKEA is going to be thought of in 10, 20 or 50 years. Maybe people will love it or maybe it will be a laughingstock -- nobody knows, so why use that as an argument??? It would be just as silly to say "Gee, it looks great now, but in the future, people are going to hate it." Of course, you can think that, but do you really think that's an argument?

The other argument, comparing it to the St Louis Arch, is even worse. It assumes that somehow the two edifices are somehow similar in some significant respect and thus public reaction to them will be similar. They are different edifices, we are different publics, one is genuinely original (whether you like it or not--I happen to) and the other is a hoary imitation of much-better known (and genuinely monumental) monuments. Why would anyone even compare them? Why not compare a WalMart to the Taj Mahal? They both occupy space...

Moderator: see? snide and catty...

Dumbstoner, if you can read my post, you'll see that what you've come up with isn't AT ALL what I wrote. What is unintelligent is to criticize someone's words when you apparently haven't bothered to read them. I've already said that I wasn't comparing the Arch to this monument. And I totally agree with your statement that "no one knows what this monument will be in the coming years". That is the exact point I made many posts ago.

[Tombstoner]

The first argument was MarketWorks, the second is yours.

[Tombstoner]

I'm sure the moderator knows the difference between criticizing the validity of an argument and calling names

[ThrashATL]

When the moderator has a name like "Mayhem" you can bet he'll tolerate a bunch before he dropkicks!

[sprtsluvr8]

Both of those statements are great examples of fallacious reasoning.

Did you mean felatious? Are you flirting with me again? I told you no every time!